Share This Story!

Rieder: Don't make reporter testify against a source

The New York Times ran a story the other day about a dilemma facing the Obama administration: whether to pursue its efforts to force Times reporter James Risen to testify in its prosecution of a former CIA

The New York Times ran a story the other day about a dilemma facing the Obama administration: whether to pursue its efforts to force Times reporter James Risen to testify in its prosecution of a former CIA agent suspected of leaking classified material.

If it does so, it's clear that Risen will refuse to violate his promise of confidentiality to his source and face the prospect of going to jail, reinforcing the administration's image as no friend of the First Amendment or powerful investigative reporting. If it backs off, it clearly would disappoint the prosecutors in the case of Jeffrey Sterling and those in the intelligence community who relish the administration's unprecedented zeal in pursuing those who leak classified information.

Well, I can make this simple: Team Obama, leave James Risen alone. Don't turn legitimate public-interest journalism into a criminal activity.

Let's do a cost/benefit analysis. What's the upside for the Obama administration? Maybe it would strengthen the case against Sterling, who is charged with leaking information in Risen's book State of War about U.S. efforts to sabotage Iran's nuclear program.

But Risen has made it clear he won't go back on his word and talk about a confidential source. And the administration hardly has to prove it's tough on leaks. It has already launched eight leaks prosecutions against government officials, far more than all previous administrations combined.

As to the costs, the administration that once promised to be the most transparent ever would reinforce Risen's claim that it is "the greatest enemy of press freedom that we have encountered in at least a generation."

Steven Aftergood, Project on Government Secrecy, Federation of American Scientists.(Photo: Courtesy of Steven Aftergood)

If the journalist ends up in the slammer or bankrupted by fines, "It would be dreadful for Risen, but it might prove disastrous for the administration because of the backlash it would generate," says Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy.

Aftergood said such a decision would be a severe blow to the kind of hard-edged public-interest reporting that is Risen's metier. Earlier this week, the reporter had a story about how the government had abandoned an inquiry into the security contractor Blackwater shortly before its guards shot 17 civilians in Baghdad in 2007.

If the government presses its case, "It would be announcing to all sources that a guarantee of confidentiality may be worthless," Aftergood says.

While named sources are always preferable and unnamed ones are wildly overused, anonymity sometimes is crucial to bringing to the fore information that's very important to the public. There are many cases where being identified might put a source's life at risk, or cause the source to be fired.

"The case can be made that investigative reporting, though embarrassing to the government in the short term, strengthens it in the long term," Aftergood says. "It uncovers malfeasance; it exposes error; it informs the public. And it enhances the credibility of the entire system. Wise political leaders will appreciate that and stop short of using all of their tools."

Last year the Obama administration came under heavy criticism in the wake of news that it had obtained Associated Press phone records and the phone and e-mail records of Fox News reporter James Rosen, who it suggested was a criminal co-conspirator. In response, Attorney General Eric Holder issued guidelines aimed at safeguarding reporters' rights and President Obama called on Congress to pass a federal shield law for journalists. The bill would allow reporters to protect their sources, although it has an exemption that would apply in certain national security cases. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the measure last September, but it hasn't yet made its way to the Senate floor.

Holder had some encouraging words in late May when he said: "As long as I'm attorney general, no reporter who is doing his job is going to go to jail. As long as I'm attorney general, someone who is doing their job is not going to get prosecuted."

So finish the job and abandon the effort to force Risen to violate his promise of confidentiality.